Burnt Orange Report

yawn. . .

Nice, Zach. It's good to see that you survived your 21st birthday week in tact =)

I'm with you on sg. All I want to know is who are the Democrats / progressives running for Pres/VP, 1&2 yr At-Large and Lib Arts Reps, and I'll vote for them. Besides that, I don't really care. The only relevent thing that sg has done (that I can recall) in my four years at UT is increasing email space from 10mb to 100mb (thank you Chris Kennedy for that). All I care about is helping Democrats / progressives boost their resume, because that's essentially what sg is for.

Yeah, changing the workout time limits is a STUPID idea btw. When I work out, I usually try to go before 4 PM or after 10 PM, because anytime in between requires lots of waiting for machines, but the good thing about a 20 minute limit is that even when things are pretty busy, you can usually get a treadmill or whatnot in a reasonable amount of time (rarely longer than a 10-15 min wait). It's not enforced that well, but when things are busy it's reasonably enforced. Making a 30 minute time limit would only make the waits longer. Hint: if you don't want to wait, don't work out between like 4-10pm!!! The gym is open from 6am-1am for chrissakes...

I agree. SG doesnt really have a whole lot going on. It would be cool if alot of radicals used it to piss on the administration rather than pad their resumes.

Bravo. Bravo.

at least repre[s]nt offended people. weren't you a part of that thing man?

Good points Zach. I somehow felt you were talking about me when writing about people spending 45 mins on the treadmill, but I only do it when there's nobody waiting.
I liked how, in your last paragraph, you brought up the dilemma between 'thinkig big' and 'being practical'. This has been usually a point of controversy, since critics of SG will always accuse it of either fighting for unreachable dreams or not thinking big enough. I think it is a false dilemma; my opinion is that a good SG ticket should be able to offer a balanced platform, because both things are needed.
I agree with you that it is important for SG to focus on things like increasing tution costs, top 10% rule, etc. even if it is usually hard to do. It is a question of timing as well, since a good number of these issues depend on some action from the Texas legislature, which meets every two years; in this sense if an SG administration comes into power when there is no session, it won't be able to achieve those goals. But this does not mean in any way that they shouldn't work on those issues, they should, because it can take two years (or more) to build support there.
On the more mundane or practical issues, my experience as a member of the SG is that the UT administration is usually very open to hear students complaints and do something about it. As an example we have the increase in the size of mailboxes. But it usually takes them at least six months to do anything, and in many cases a year or more, because of the slow bureaucratic processes at UT. The trick here is how to balance the openness demonstrated by the UT administration while pressing them to streamline their bureaucratic system. I know that the current SG exec has been working all year in several projects they proposed last election; they just advance slowly through all the layers of the UT administration.
As an example, I think that the campaign that promises to have enough electrical outlets for laptops on classrooms, should better say: Initiate all the process for getting this done in two or three years. That would be the honest thing to say.
I agree also in that another ticket is proposing the duplication of agencies that already exist. I don't feel the need for the student safety agency, and the Legislative Relations Agency already does some of the things proposed for another one (a very good job by the way).
As a final thought: I know several of the candidates running. I think they are all well qualified and enthusiastic. They are very nice people, that is a good thing but... my fear is that because of that, this will be largely a 'feel good', no punches, non exciting campaign.

Good post. I get tired of the SGers harassing me about stupid crap on the west mall. Its time someone took them to task on the oh-so-important job of extending treadmill time. Which is stupid anyway (I run regularly and I don't want to wait even longer to get a machine)...

1. You say the ticket names are goofy, but what kind of name would you prefer? Huge acronyms?

2. There is no Citizens' Affairs committee: it died out, thoughthere is a chair within LRA responsible for relations with the city government.

3. Regarding parking, who do you think got UT to build the Jester parking garage? Who do you think established the shuttle bus system to partially alleviate the need for campus parking? Who has been the major proponent for bike racks on campus? Who established the night horn pass? Oh yeah, I forgot that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

4. I agree that the workout limit extention is just a bad idea.

5. Student ID discounts would obviously be attempted by lobbying local businesses, not a resolution.

6. Online grade postings could be improved by systematically lobbying for policy changes at the college at departmental level. It's not impossible if you use your brain, though I can't say that I care much for this platform item itself.

7. Good point Cesar about the need to consider both large and small issues, as well as the implementation time issues that are eternally overlooked by naysayers.

8. Every SG administration has a change to lobby the legislature, it merely alternates between being at the end and the beginning of the term.

This is an extremely weak critique showing little knowledge of SG, a lack of creativity, a pessimistic outlook, and an immature attitude. What exactly did you accomplish in SG, Zach? Also, please explain which specific organization devotes more overall effort to improving campus than SG, as well as a college with a more effective Student Government than UT.

Correction: "change to lobby" in #8 should be "chance to lobby"

Oops, another typo: #6 should say "college and departmental level" not "college at departmental level".